The court hasn't given a press statement about it, but the king's solicitor Axel Calissendorff said in September to Svensk Damtidning, that the child will be a princess or prince and a HRH, because Madeleine is a HRH. Svensk Damtidning has repeated this statement many times, also in this week's issue. If the solicitor would be wrong in this matter, the court should have corrected it officially. Annika Sönnerberg, the deputy director of the press department, told to the press that the court would inform about the possible title and place in the succession order when the child is born, she told this after the court had sent a press release that Madeleine will give birth in New York.

Thanks for this, LadyFinn. It would make more sense if she isn't given a royal title as I remember reading that in Europe, children are given the same title as their father, e.g. a Count of X's daughter would be known as Countess of X, a Prince's daughter would be known as Princess of X, etc. And another thanks to those who answered my post regarding the Count/ess Bernadotte of Wisborg title, now I know how that came about into becoming a Luxembourgish one. Makes more sense now.

__________________

__________________"For beautiful eyes, look for the good in others; for beautiful lips, speak only words of kindness; and for poise, walk with the knowledge that you are never alone". Audrey Hepburn

*"Think of all the beauty still left around you and be happy". Anne Frank

Thanks for this, LadyFinn. It would make more sense if she isn't given a royal title as I remember reading that in Europe, children are given the same title as their father, e.g. a Count of X's daughter would be known as Countess of X, a Prince's daughter would be known as Princess of X, etc. And another thanks to those who answered my post regarding the Count/ess Bernadotte of Wisborg title, now I know how that came about into becoming a Luxembourgish one. Makes more sense now.

Erm, wouldn't that be at odds with the spirit of the law that changed Swedens Royal Succession from Male Primogeniture to Absolute Primogeniture, given royal women equality and promoting Princess Victoria to Crown Princess Victoria.

Would/should that not also translate to passing their name and their title?

__________________

__________________MARG"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes

I wouldn't say it gives royal women "equality" in all things. It gives them equal opportunity to inherit titles and if they themselves inherit then they then can pass on titles to their children.

That doesn't change whether women who aren't the monarch (or in the direct line of succession) can pass titles on to their daughters. If I'm correct, Estelle has her title by the will of her grandfather, not because of who her mother is.

It's the king who decides if the child will be given a title or not, and perhaps he has already informed Madeleine that he won't be giving the baby a title, and that's the reason why she will give birth in the U.S., so that it will look less like a rejection if the child doesn't get some kind of title.

At the moment there is only one heir in the second generation after our current King. Let's hope nothing tragic happens but it is not a given that Princess Estelle lives to the age when she takes over the reins, that CP Victoria has more children or that P Carl Philip has off-spring. It makes perfect sense that P Madeleine's children stay in the line of succession. It may some day be irrelevant due to future family sizes of CP Victoria and P Carl Philip, but as of today it is not. The royal family will have made an excellent strategic move if the new baby retains her place in the succession. The Swedish royal family is very small and could easily die out in the future. I hope for long lives and big families for all of them.

In order to be in the line of succession the child has to be raised in Sweden. By having the birth in New York, people are taking it as an indication that Madeline and Chris aren't planning on raising their daughter in Sweden.

I suspect that Madeleine and Chris have had long discussions about this issue, and have also discussed it with CG. A child has to be brought up in Sweden to be in line of succession, but is "brought up in" defined in the Act of Succession?

I've found this translation of the relevant part of what I assume is the 1979 Act of Succession:

"The right of succession to the throne of Sweden is vested in the male and female descendants of King Carl XVI Gustaf's ... issue in direct line of descent. In this connection, older siblings and their descendants have precedence over younger siblings and their descendants... The King shall always profess the pure evangelical faith, as adopted and explained in the unaltered onfession of Augsburg and in the Resolution of the Uppsala Meeting of the year 1593, princes and princesses of the Royal House shall be brought up in that same faith and within the Realm. Any member of the Royal Family not professing this faith shall be excluded from all rights of succession... A prince or princess of the Royal House may not marry unless the Government has given its consent thereto upon an application from The King. Should a prince or princess marry without such consent, that prince or princess forfeits the right of succession for himself, his children and their descendants... A prince or princess of the Swedish Royal House may not become the sovereign ruler of a foreign state whether by election, succession, or marriage without the consent of The King and the Riksdag. Should this occur, neither he nor she nor their descendants shall be entitled to succeed to the throne of Sweden."

Now while it does say that princes and princesses of the Royal House shall be brought up within the Realm, it does not define "brought up", nor does it emphasise, as it does about faith, that if they are not brought up within the Realm they shall be excluded from all rights of succession.

The questions of whether or not Victoria is to have more children and whether or not CP is going to have children should be resolved within the next five years or so. If after such a period of time there are no more children to fill the places in the succession between Estelle and their daughter, Madeleine and Chris may revisit their decision to bring up their child outside of the Realm. If they move back when she's only five, and she has all her schooling in Sweden, the early absence might be overlooked.

As long as she is made a princess, and as long as she is raised in her mother's faith, I don't see where she lives for these first few years as being a major issue, certainly not fatal to her chances of being in the line of succession.

And of course the Act of Succession could be amended if deemed necessary.

__________________"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"

Madeleine has chosen to marry and have children with a man who is American/British. This man has a big career based in New York. Why would he give that up to become a "husband of a princess" in Sweden? That would make him not much of a man, in my opinion. I am sure (at least I hope) Madeleine and Christopher talked about all of this before they decided to get married. Their children will have the last name of O'Neill and will be raised in America. Apparently they don't care about succession for their offspring. I don't understand what is so strange about that to some people. Chris is not Daniel, who gave up HIS life to become his wife's consort and purse-holder. Chris is obviously a real man and I respect him for insisting that his children have his name and live in his world. Good for him.

Madeleine has chosen to marry and have children with a man who is American/British. This man has a big career based in New York. Why would he give that up to become a "husband of a princess" in Sweden? That would make him not much of a man, in my opinion. I am sure (at least I hope) Madeleine and Christopher talked about all of this before they decided to get married. Their children will have the last name of O'Neill and will be raised in America. Apparently they don't care about succession for their offspring. I don't understand what is so strange about that to some people. Chris is not Daniel, who gave up HIS life to become his wife's consort and purse-holder. Chris is obviously a real man and I respect him for insisting that his children have his name and live in his world. Good for him.

Sorry, but this is just plain idiotic. What you write means, that only woman have to give up their lifes for their husbands and never the other way around. Men are only real men if they insist on living their life as they always used to do and women have to change their life to blend in with the life of their husbands. And if it's the other way around the man isn't a real man because he gave up his life (as the woman would naturally have to do).

Being married is NOT about someone giving up their life and becoming just a nice assistent for their spouses. Being married ist to create a life together with both giving up a few things and change around a few things of their single-life.

Victoria and Daniel choose another way of living than Madeleine and Chris. But none of them gave up their live completely for their spouses. And that's exactly how it should be.

Sorry, but this is just plain idiotic. What you write means, that only woman have to give up their lifes for their husbands and never the other way around. Men are only real men if they insist on living their life as they always used to do and women have to change their life to blend in with the life of their husbands. And if it's the other way around the man isn't a real man because he gave up his life (as the woman would naturally have to do).

Being married is NOT about someone giving up their life and becoming just a nice assistent for their spouses. Being married ist to create a life together with both giving up a few things and change around a few things of their single-life.

Victoria and Daniel choose another way of living than Madeleine and Chris. But none of them gave up their live completely for their spouses. And that's exactly how it should be.

That's exactly what I said . . . Daniel gave up HIS life (he was a successful businessman, apparently) in order to marry Victoria; Chris has decided he does not want to give up his successful business career in order to marry Madeleine. Madeleine gave up nothing. That was their joint decision. It is still my opinion that Chris is more of a real man than Daniel who gave up a real business making real money to live off the Swedish taxpayers in order to marry a princess and live an antiquated existence. Royalty is fun to read about but, really, how important is it? Not very. They do nothing to make the world better. They are welfare recipients, really. No need to lecture me about equality, thank you anyway.

And all this talk about the Swedish succession. In my opinion, by the time Prince George, Princess Estelle and the rest of the small children of the royal families of Europe are old enough to "reign" no one will want them and they will be ex-kings/queens living off whatever money they have managed to stash away.

Sorry, but this is just plain idiotic. What you write means, that only woman have to give up their lifes for their husbands and never the other way around. Men are only real men if they insist on living their life as they always used to do and women have to change their life to blend in with the life of their husbands. And if it's the other way around the man isn't a real man because he gave up his life (as the woman would naturally have to do).

Being married is NOT about someone giving up their life and becoming just a nice assistent for their spouses. Being married ist to create a life together with both giving up a few things and change around a few things of their single-life.

Victoria and Daniel choose another way of living than Madeleine and Chris. But none of them gave up their live completely for their spouses. And that's exactly how it should be.

I wish I'd said this, but I didn't, so I'll just quote it and say I totally agree. I think the post deserves to be quoted in full and given gold stars.

__________________"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"

That's exactly what I said . . . Daniel gave up HIS life (he was a successful businessman, apparently) in order to marry Victoria; Chris has decided he does not want to give up his successful business career in order to marry Madeleine. Madeleine gave up nothing. That was their joint decision. It is still my opinion that Chris is more of a real man than Daniel who gave up a real business making real money to live off the Swedish taxpayers in order to marry a princess and live an antiquated existence. Royalty is fun to read about but, really, how important is it? Not very. They do nothing to make the world better. They are welfare recipients, really. No need to lecture me about equality, thank you anyway.

And all this talk about the Swedish succession. In my opinion, by the time Prince George, Princess Estelle and the rest of the small children of the royal families of Europe are old enough to "reign" no one will want them and they will be ex-kings/queens living off whatever money they have managed to stash away.

You seem to forget that Madeleine is not the heir, whereas Victoria is. Daniel is the spouse of a woman who one day will be Queen. Chris became the spouse of a woman who went down the line of succession as soon as Victoria started her family (and when C-P will start his). A significant difference.

Daniel was a personal trainer and a gym owner. You tell me how that would work out next to his duties as a Prince of Sweden. I'm kinda interested.

And Daniel made the decision (and most likely was ordered to) to become a public persona to marry a woman he loved for many years. That hardly makes him less of a man than Chris is. I smell misogyny and it stinks.

That's exactly what I said . . . Daniel gave up HIS life (he was a successful businessman, apparently) in order to marry Victoria; Chris has decided he does not want to give up his successful business career in order to marry Madeleine. Madeleine gave up nothing. That was their joint decision. It is still my opinion that Chris is more of a real man than Daniel who gave up a real business making real money to live off the Swedish taxpayers in order to marry a princess and live an antiquated existence. Royalty is fun to read about but, really, how important is it? Not very. They do nothing to make the world better. They are welfare recipients, really. No need to lecture me about equality, thank you anyway.

And all this talk about the Swedish succession. In my opinion, by the time Prince George, Princess Estelle and the rest of the small children of the royal families of Europe are old enough to "reign" no one will want them and they will be ex-kings/queens living off whatever money they have managed to stash away.

1st bolded word:

Have you read my post? Obviously not, because I never said Daniel gave up his life. He just changed a bit. He is not a fitness trainer any more but does sport in his leisure time, gies to sport events, talks with athlets, etc. He may not do business of his own anymore but he talks with young people who try to start their own business, he mets up with business men and visits their companies, etc. He has become a real voice for all those people. He also has become a voice and face for organ transplant which is even more important. Yes, he may not get any salary and officially lives of his wifes salary, but what is bad about that? One partner living of the salary of the other is not new. No one says anything if the woman lives of the salary of the man. Why is it a prblem the other way around? Because the penis is on the wrong side of the paycheck? This thinking is intolerant and very, very old-fashioned.

2nd bolded words:

They definitely are of use. They represent a country. They are the faces of their country. They bring tourists into the country and make them buy merchandise, book expensive hotels just to watch them get married, etc. And thus they ensure for a lot of working places (merchandise maker, hotel staff, TV people, etc).

I am from a country which doesn't have royalty anymore and I wish we would still be a monarchy. Because we also pay for people who represent us but no one really nows them. Or could you list all the presidents of Germany, their spouses, their children and grandchildren? We get a new president every few years and have to pay for them even if they don't work as presidents anymore. No one in Germany is interested in their weddings, as is the world. Which means no tourists for weddings, no merchandise, nothing of all the positiv side-effects the royals do in other countries. Believe me, royals are of use and have a hard working day even if it doesn't look that way. And I really wish we would still have a royal family.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roslyn

I wish I'd said this, but I didn't, so I'll just quote it and say I totally agree. I think the post deserves to be quoted in full and given gold stars.

And all this talk about the Swedish succession. In my opinion, by the time Prince George, Princess Estelle and the rest of the small children of the royal families of Europe are old enough to "reign" no one will want them and they will be ex-kings/queens living off whatever money they have managed to stash away.

Well, people used to say the same thing about their grandparents generation.

No, there hasn't been an official statement about that their daughter will not be in the succession order. But the Act of Succession says that their daughter must be raised within the Realm and in the same faith. And so far all the experts have said that it means that Madeleine and Chris must move to Sweden at least when their daughter starts her school. Like Annika Sönnerberg from the press department said, they will tell all the information when the girl is born. Obviously we will have to wait for until then.

About Daniel being less a man when he gave up his job, I just can't understand this kind of thinking. People, even men, change their jobs almost every day, nothing new in that. Daniel changed his job as a gym owner and entrepreneur (and working just for himself) to a job as a Prince of Sweden, where is works for the whole Sweden and the people of Sweden, not just for himself and his family. His work can be evaluated every day in public unlike Chris', Daniel has himself said that he is a public person and people can criticize him freely if he is doing a lousy work. Daniel is doing a very good work, he can be very proud of himself. And I'm sure that his wife is very proud of him.

Yes I have to agree that Prince Daniel seems to be doing a wonderful job and is quite respectful of the position he married into.

There are so many fathers that I know who gave up their jobs to raise the children because the mother earned a bigger income. That doesn't mean they have given up their life or are lesser men because they gave up their job. I have to disagree.

The fact that PM chooses to live in the USA when bringing up her child is something I am sure she has discussed with the King.

As for British and European royalty going out the window in the next couple of generations is based on what information? I think these Royal Houses (maybe the Spanish RF is going through a "difficult period!) are very popular in their countries and show no sign of crumbling yet.

Chris is not Daniel, who gave up HIS life to become his wife's consort and purse-holder. Chris is obviously a real man and I respect him for insisting that his children have his name and live in his world. Good for him.

How can these two be compared? Daniel will be consort to a Queen monarch, Chris is the husband of a swedish princess. You will not find any other consort to a future monarch who kept his or her 'old' job and is NOT working full time for the country.

Madeleine has chosen to marry and have children with a man who is American/British. This man has a big career based in New York. Why would he give that up to become a "husband of a princess" in Sweden? That would make him not much of a man, in my opinion. I am sure (at least I hope) Madeleine and Christopher talked about all of this before they decided to get married. Their children will have the last name of O'Neill and will be raised in America. Apparently they don't care about succession for their offspring.

Well, this is full of supposition but that is neither here nor there. Your lack of understanding of the role of being "a husband of a princess" is actually amusing. As to what their children will be called? As yet, no one knows except them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mslewis

I don't understand what is so strange about that to some people. Chris is not Daniel, who gave up HIS life to become his wife's consort and purse-holder.

Wow, Daniel gave up his "life" to become his wife's consort and purse holder". Daniel may have become his wife's consort but, as far as I know, he didn't give up his life. He did, like many people, change his career. Once he answered to his Shareholders, now he answers to the King and people of Sweden and, if you think being the spouse of an heir is just purse holding, I suggest you try calling Prince Philip that to his face. He would be far more articulate in his contempt of your ignorance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mslewis

Chris is obviously a real man and I respect him for insisting that his children have his name and live in his world.

Well yes you are of course quite right, Chris and Daniel are both real men. Are there many fake ones around? As to insisting that his children have his name and live in his world, well, we don't know that and unless you've been a fly on the wall, you don't know that either. I would also like to point out he met his wife in "his" world and I suspect that his family and the Bernadotte family share many friends, acquaintances and long winter ski holidays, in common.

__________________MARG"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes